@shian I agree. people talk about the color space of the GH2 and lack of DR. But if you know what you are doing, you can workaround these issues, especially the color.

The tests, which are ingenious and artful, do not meet the bare minimum for scientific blind testing, and really it should be double blind. When ppl do post without identifying the camera, the results are shocking. Seasoned veterans will conflate a point and shoot with a high end cam. BUT, and this is important, it does seem that you can grade the vid differently with a nice hack.

Disclaimer: I picked the hacked GH1 over the hacked GH2 when Lee put them up without labels. But since I basically have to trust whatever eyes I have, I have to be honest with myself, and of course there are ppl who can see better than others. I picked that one. OK. BFD.

When PB put up a bunch of clips in one of his shootouts, it was pretty hilarious to see the "identifications", Andrew Reid did a similar thing which was even more extreme. I posted a lens comparison once and most people picked the $13 lens. Actually, most people didn't pick anything, such semi-blind tests never get a lot of takers. No one want's to pick the cheap cam.

But again, it isn't just the video. You could dig a hole with a plastic shovel and a steel one, and the plastic one might even look nicer, but the pro will go for the steel one. We all have to have a reality check now and then, but no one wants to look dumb and the cam companies have to sell cams, so it won't happen very often.

And maybe that's OK~after all, pixel peeping is just that.

A forum is not designed to show of the inherent weaknesses in the human eye--or ear--and I doubt that it ever will be. But you can learn a ton of great stuff from your colleagues, and you can test the gear easy enough for yourself. I once sold a very, very expensive mic because it consistently got beat by a much cheaper one. I put gaffer tape over the label when I use it in a big show. Don't want anyone to see it.

Another way to look at it is the ppl have the right to use whatever gear they want, and really the technical skill is what makes a compelling story. Citizen Kane makes use of "Deep Focus". Do ppl talk about that? Not very often on forums. But a nice hack (flowmotion) a cheap hyperfocal (panny 14mm), some grading and maybe a touch of Neat Video to compensate for stopping down, and wow, works for me.

I thought "Nonsense of the Settings" was the new Wachowski Brothers movie :(
No, sounds more like a Michel Gondry movie.

I have shot numerous films both long and short, and these are paid gigs, some by govt agencies, on different settings, and I can attest the hacks DO make a difference. Like someone said, if you are making cat videos straight to Vimeo or Youtube, don't bother even using a GH2. Any $50 camcorder, or even your iphone will be grand enough. I have actually blown up footage acquired on both stock and hacked settings, and projected it on big screen. Trust me, Nick Driftwood and friends did not waste their precious time producing in your words, "a big hoax."

@jleo +1 esp that bit on Michael Gondry